Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments. Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
I am blessed to have a piano teacher who is a scholar and skilled concert pianist. He can make the piano sound like a cello or a flute, like a human voice, like weeping, laughter, rain, ocean waves, sunshine…the list is endless. When asked, he explains that it is a combination of finger articulation, subtle timing, voicing, dynamics, phrasing, expert pedaling and understanding the music, the composer, the era when the music was written and the kind of instruments available at the time.
True, you can’t move the strings on a piano but you can change the speed and force of the hammers hitting or caressing those strings. You can also change the interaction of the dampers with the strings using the pedals and (on a grand) you can shift the position of the dampers so some strings are muffled. The piano doesn’t have to sound percussive at all but it takes years to learn how to make it sing.
Not to denigrate your teacher's ability, I would bet that anyone who listened to him in a blind test would know he is playing a piano, no matter what instrument he is trying to sound like.
I don't think it is meant literally like those instruments. You can dance like a swan for instance but a person can see that you look like a human and not like a swan.
I think the list of what dogperson's teacher can make a piano sound like depends mostly on the music being played and the imagination of the listener. Can he make the funeral march in Chopin's Sonata sound like a flute, laughter, rain, or sunshine? Of course not. There aren't ways to make a piano sound like weeping unless the music sounds like weeping. It's primarily the music that evokes some response or image. If the pianists is very good they might evoke a clearer response. If someone is playing a melodic line in the part of the keyboard within the two octaves below middle C then it could be imitative of a cello but that's because of the range of notes being playing and the pianist's ability to play a singing line.
I think you’re referring to the wrong dog; the reference is to a post by Gooddog 😸
Piano a percussive instrument definitely. But not the kind of sound we get out of a marimba or vibe. The attack is not as acute and you can sustain notes & chords using the right pedal producing a dreamlike sound.
Before Christmas I played a piece written for a ensemble arranged for piano. The sound is more accented than the original with flutes, violins, viola & cello. Not intended to imitate the original but has a unique piano quality.
Not to denigrate your teacher's ability, I would bet that anyone who listened to him in a blind test would know he is playing a piano, no matter what instrument he is trying to sound like.
I don't think it is meant literally like those instruments. You can dance like a swan for instance but a person can see that you look like a human and not like a swan.
I think the list of what dogperson's teacher can make a piano sound like depends mostly on the music being played and the imagination of the listener. Can he make the funeral march in Chopin's Sonata sound like a flute, laughter, rain, or sunshine? Of course not. There aren't ways to make a piano sound like weeping unless the music sounds like weeping. It's primarily the music that evokes some response or image. If the pianists is very good they might evoke a clearer response. If someone is playing a melodic line in the part of the keyboard within the two octaves below middle C then it could be imitative of a cello but that's because of the range of notes being playing and the pianist's ability to play a singing line.
I think you’re referring to the wrong dog; the reference is to a post by Gooddog 😸
Keep in mind I am not a piano hater, otherwise I would not be on this website, it would probably still be my favorite.
Originally Posted by Josephine83
Originally Posted by probably blue
Ok seems a perfect match haha, piano and cello?
I think it's the best match, I love the cello. If I were going to learn another instrument it would be the cello!
I have to learn Bach Suite no.1 though!
Originally Posted by SouthPark
Originally Posted by probably blue
I believe cello you still play sitting so still nice 👍
True! Although ..... it's necessary to pick it up and hold it .... sort of. But ... jokes aside. A cello is certainly very expressive.
Back to jokes again ..... they also make a nice toboggan/sled for getting away from the baddies on ski slopes!
Well it sort of just rests on you I guess... how heavy even is a cello?
(One google search later...)
apparently 5-7 pounds?
Yes, it makes a great sled! I’ll just tell my family “I can use it for sledding and playing! It’s worth it!”
Originally Posted by Rubens
Never been fond of this idea of making the piano sound like another instrument. Why can't it just sound like a beautiful piano sound? Do teachers of other instruments ever tell their students to try to make their instrument sound like a piano? Is the piano timbre so uninteresting that we have to resort to emulating other instruments? Instead of trying to sound like a cello, can't we just try to produce a beautiful warm piano tone that no other instrument can imitate? Too often we hear this shaming of the percussive nature of the piano. The percussive aspect can sound beautiful, even lyrical if done right. We should embrace the percussive aspect of our instrument instead of trying to camouflage it. If you don't like the idea of hammers being propelled to hit strings, just quit the piano and get a goddamn cello.
Oh my this thread was a mistake. I should have known.
I am not shaming the percussion nature of a piano, it’s a great instrument. I didn’t mean that is all a piano can do, why the heck would I quit?
Originally Posted by bennevis
There's a very good reason why the piano took off into the stratosphere soon after its invention and development, especially in the early 19th century (coinciding with the Romantic movement in music), whereas other instruments didn't. (In fact, the nearest instrument to that would be the clarinet, with Mozart's and Brahms's advocacy - based in large part on their friendships with remarkable exponents of the clarinet: Anton Stadler and Richard Mühlfeld.)
The reason is that the piano is capable of far more expressive capabilities than any other musical instrument: it can be a whole orchestra (Liszt), or a diva soaring into the high C's (Thalberg), or a pipe organ (Busoni), or a 100-piece choir, or any number of musical instruments. Or a percussion instrument, of course (Bartók's Sonata for 2 pianos & percussion) - once you understand and have a mastery of how to articulate, voice and......very importantly, how to use the pedal.
Which is why beginners and intermediates find the piano limiting and wish they could 'make sounds' and 'do things' with the piano that they can't, and start looking to learn other instruments........with the result that they never gain sufficient mastery of their original instrument and therefore never know of its capabilities in the right hands, and ultimately fulfil their own preconceptions. I was fortunate in that as an unmusical and ignorant kid, my first teacher played a classical piece for me after every lesson, and showed me - right from the beginning - what the piano is capable of (even the tinny little vertical on which I was having my lessons and playing on at home): everything from a sotto voce whisper to glorious full voice to thunder and lightning, from raindrops (Jardins sous la pluie, not Raindrop P.) and water (Jeux d'eau, Une barque sur l'océan, Ondine) to sheer devilry (Danse macabre, Dante S., Scarbo). I knew right from day one that the only limiting factor to my imaginative re-creations was my own capabilities, which was why I was spurred on to keep practicing........and my teacher made no bones about the fact that it would take many, many years to get to that level. (Of course, she didn't tell me: multiply that by ten, based on my musical talent equivalent to that of a Tandonia budapestensis - she was always nothing if not encouraging, knowing that I was doing my best.)
So, I stuck with it, even after she left for greener pastures abroad, and realized her wisdom as I kept on developing my skills with subsequent teachers, while having fun all the way........until I reached the level when I could 'reproduce' the sounds I had in my head at will.
Yes, other instruments are 'easier' (for instance, I could accompany myself singing pop songs within an hour of being given a guitar and a songbook with guitar chords, and I could play the ocarina within 15 minutes ), but none are so satisfying to develop one's self-expression. And most great composers, from Mozart onwards, realized that - which is why the oeuvre for solo piano, chamber music with piano and piano concertos outstrip that of all other instruments combined by a factor of at least 1000.
Oh, before I forget: let's listen to cello & piano, singing their collective hearts out - where would the cello be without the piano here? :
I am not intermediate though! Or do I just think that I think I am more early advanced if that makes sense.
Of course I am going to try and master piano, it will be my favorite still.
Actually, I want a more portable instrument that I can play in a room without bothering others as much, the piano is in the main living area and the sound basically goes through the whole house, it’s not that piano is really limiting. (Was I just trying to make a discussion topic? ) Also, sometimes I get bored after practicing and want to alternate instruments, practice piano then I can go practice cello.
It sucks I can’t play both at the same time.
Originally Posted by Josephine83
You can't do a vibrato sound on a piano like you can with a flute or a violin for instance, you have to work with what's there. It's different, but it can sing. Just listen to Horowitz.
This is what I meant. Right on!
Originally Posted by thepianoplayer416
Piano a percussive instrument definitely. But not the kind of sound we get out of a marimba or vibe. The attack is not as acute and you can sustain notes & chords using the right pedal producing a dreamlike sound.
Before Christmas I played a piece written for a ensemble arranged for piano. The sound is more accented than the original with flutes, violins, viola & cello. Not intended to imitate the original but has a unique piano quality.
Keep in mind I am not a piano hater, otherwise I would not be on this website, it would probably still be my favorite.
Originally Posted by Josephine83
Originally Posted by probably blue
Ok seems a perfect match haha, piano and cello?
I think it's the best match, I love the cello. If I were going to learn another instrument it would be the cello!
I have to learn Bach Suite no.1 though!
Originally Posted by SouthPark
Originally Posted by probably blue
I believe cello you still play sitting so still nice 👍
True! Although ..... it's necessary to pick it up and hold it .... sort of. But ... jokes aside. A cello is certainly very expressive.
Back to jokes again ..... they also make a nice toboggan/sled for getting away from the baddies on ski slopes!
Well it sort of just rests on you I guess... how heavy even is a cello?
(One google search later...)
apparently 5-7 pounds?
Yes, it makes a great sled! I’ll just tell my family “I can use it for sledding and playing! It’s worth it!”
Originally Posted by Rubens
Never been fond of this idea of making the piano sound like another instrument. Why can't it just sound like a beautiful piano sound? Do teachers of other instruments ever tell their students to try to make their instrument sound like a piano? Is the piano timbre so uninteresting that we have to resort to emulating other instruments? Instead of trying to sound like a cello, can't we just try to produce a beautiful warm piano tone that no other instrument can imitate? Too often we hear this shaming of the percussive nature of the piano. The percussive aspect can sound beautiful, even lyrical if done right. We should embrace the percussive aspect of our instrument instead of trying to camouflage it. If you don't like the idea of hammers being propelled to hit strings, just quit the piano and get a goddamn cello.
Oh my this thread was a mistake. I should have known.
I am not shaming the percussion nature of a piano, it’s a great instrument. I didn’t mean that is all a piano can do, why the heck would I quit?
Originally Posted by bennevis
There's a very good reason why the piano took off into the stratosphere soon after its invention and development, especially in the early 19th century (coinciding with the Romantic movement in music), whereas other instruments didn't. (In fact, the nearest instrument to that would be the clarinet, with Mozart's and Brahms's advocacy - based in large part on their friendships with remarkable exponents of the clarinet: Anton Stadler and Richard Mühlfeld.)
The reason is that the piano is capable of far more expressive capabilities than any other musical instrument: it can be a whole orchestra (Liszt), or a diva soaring into the high C's (Thalberg), or a pipe organ (Busoni), or a 100-piece choir, or any number of musical instruments. Or a percussion instrument, of course (Bartók's Sonata for 2 pianos & percussion) - once you understand and have a mastery of how to articulate, voice and......very importantly, how to use the pedal.
Which is why beginners and intermediates find the piano limiting and wish they could 'make sounds' and 'do things' with the piano that they can't, and start looking to learn other instruments........with the result that they never gain sufficient mastery of their original instrument and therefore never know of its capabilities in the right hands, and ultimately fulfil their own preconceptions. I was fortunate in that as an unmusical and ignorant kid, my first teacher played a classical piece for me after every lesson, and showed me - right from the beginning - what the piano is capable of (even the tinny little vertical on which I was having my lessons and playing on at home): everything from a sotto voce whisper to glorious full voice to thunder and lightning, from raindrops (Jardins sous la pluie, not Raindrop P.) and water (Jeux d'eau, Une barque sur l'océan, Ondine) to sheer devilry (Danse macabre, Dante S., Scarbo). I knew right from day one that the only limiting factor to my imaginative re-creations was my own capabilities, which was why I was spurred on to keep practicing........and my teacher made no bones about the fact that it would take many, many years to get to that level. (Of course, she didn't tell me: multiply that by ten, based on my musical talent equivalent to that of a Tandonia budapestensis - she was always nothing if not encouraging, knowing that I was doing my best.)
So, I stuck with it, even after she left for greener pastures abroad, and realized her wisdom as I kept on developing my skills with subsequent teachers, while having fun all the way........until I reached the level when I could 'reproduce' the sounds I had in my head at will.
Yes, other instruments are 'easier' (for instance, I could accompany myself singing pop songs within an hour of being given a guitar and a songbook with guitar chords, and I could play the ocarina within 15 minutes ), but none are so satisfying to develop one's self-expression. And most great composers, from Mozart onwards, realized that - which is why the oeuvre for solo piano, chamber music with piano and piano concertos outstrip that of all other instruments combined by a factor of at least 1000.
Oh, before I forget: let's listen to cello & piano, singing their collective hearts out - where would the cello be without the piano here? :
I am not intermediate though! Or do I just think that I think I am more early advanced if that makes sense.
Of course I am going to try and master piano, it will be my favorite still.
Actually, I want a more portable instrument that I can play in a room without bothering others as much, the piano is in the main living area and the sound basically goes through the whole house, it’s not that piano is really limiting. (Was I just trying to make a discussion topic? ) Also, sometimes I get bored after practicing and want to alternate instruments, practice piano then I can go practice cello.
It sucks I can’t play both at the same time.
Originally Posted by Josephine83
You can't do a vibrato sound on a piano like you can with a flute or a violin for instance, you have to work with what's there. It's different, but it can sing. Just listen to Horowitz.
This is what I meant. Right on!
Originally Posted by thepianoplayer416
Piano a percussive instrument definitely. But not the kind of sound we get out of a marimba or vibe. The attack is not as acute and you can sustain notes & chords using the right pedal producing a dreamlike sound.
Before Christmas I played a piece written for a ensemble arranged for piano. The sound is more accented than the original with flutes, violins, viola & cello. Not intended to imitate the original but has a unique piano quality.
It is certainly dreamlike.
Only you can answer whether you should be categorized intermediate — but on the teacher’s forum you stated you have been self-teaching for three years and consider yourself to be intermediate.
You typically don't imagine the instrument itself. If you have a very clear aural image of a piece, it is perhaps possible, but otherwise what do you have to draw from when it comes to musicality? Singing is an obvious answer as it's the least abstract. After all, if you think about it, playing an instrument is producing pitches at certain volumes -- how do you decide the pitch and volume? I think the answer is by taking inspiration from other things, like singing or natural sounds, etc.
I am blessed to have a piano teacher who is a scholar and skilled concert pianist. He can make the piano sound like a cello or a flute, like a human voice, like weeping, laughter, rain, ocean waves, sunshine…the list is endless. When asked, he explains that it is a combination of finger articulation, subtle timing, voicing, dynamics, phrasing, expert pedaling and understanding the music, the composer, the era when the music was written and the kind of instruments available at the time.
True, you can’t move the strings on a piano but you can change the speed and force of the hammers hitting or caressing those strings. You can also change the interaction of the dampers with the strings using the pedals and (on a grand) you can shift the position of the dampers so some strings are muffled. The piano doesn’t have to sound percussive at all but it takes years to learn how to make it sing.
Not to denigrate your teacher's ability, I would bet that anyone who listened to him in a blind test would know he is playing a piano, no matter what instrument he is trying to sound like.
Well, duh. Of course it sounds like a piano! A beginner or even an intermediate player may think the range of the instrument is limited to loud or soft, staccato or legato but there is a wide range of color and tone you can create if you have the skill, the ears and the right instrument. It is possible to evoke a feeling of other instruments, emotions or things, not literally the exact sound of a cello, etc.
Originally Posted by Josephine83
I don't think it is meant literally like those instruments. You can dance like a swan for instance but a person can see that you look like a human and not like a swan.
I think the list of what dogperson's teacher can make a piano sound like depends mostly on the music being played and the imagination of the listener. Can he make the funeral march in Chopin's Sonata sound like a flute, laughter, rain, or sunshine? Of course not. There aren't ways to make a piano sound like weeping unless the music sounds like weeping. It's primarily the music that evokes some response or image. If the pianists is very good they might evoke a clearer response. If someone is playing a melodic line in the part of the keyboard within the two octaves below middle C then it could be imitative of a cello but that's because of the range of notes being playing and the pianist's ability to play a singing line.
You make a good point. The composition itself will evoke certain emotions and the listener brings his or her own experiences to the music. But, as you say, how the music is played and interpreted can greatly enhance this. I wish everyone could hear a concert pianist up close. I wish you could stand in my teacher's tiny studio as he plays his Steinway D. When your eyes fill with tears or your knees turn to jelly you can fully understand what a really fine piano(ist) can do to a fine composition.
I think everyone on these forums is aware that a synthesizer can add ultimate options of sounds to music. But what is really being discussed here is the sound possibilities of playing an acoustic or digital through the keys alone, not adding artificial sounds through technology,
Your assumption could be right. But it could also be wrong - about 'everyone' on these forums. The OP is thinking of learning a new instrument. And I don't know for sure if the OP had delved into that particular area before. While synths can't do all that a violin can do into terms of expression, it does offer something a bit extra ------ in expression. That's referring to:
Originally Posted by SouthPark
With adequately good sound samples and suitable midi sequencing gear .... you can do this sort of thing with synths. LINK
The OP has a good plan regarding expression, as in choosing to learn to play another instrument. In this case - the OP currently has an eye on cello. A nice choice.
I think everyone on these forums is aware that a synthesizer can add ultimate options of sounds to music. But what is really being discussed here is the sound possibilities of playing an acoustic or digital through the keys alone, not adding artificial sounds through technology,
Your assumption could be right. But it could also be wrong - about 'everyone' on these forums. The OP is thinking of learning a new instrument. And I don't know for sure if the OP had delved into that particular area before. While synths can't do all that a violin can do into terms of expression, it does offer something a bit extra ------ in expression. That's referring to:
Originally Posted by SouthPark
With adequately good sound samples and suitable midi sequencing gear .... you can do this sort of thing with synths. LINK
The OP has a good plan regarding expression, as in choosing to learn to play another instrument. In this case - the OP currently has an eye on cello. A nice choice.
Never been fond of this idea of making the piano sound like another instrument. Why can't it just sound like a beautiful piano sound? Do teachers of other instruments ever tell their students to try to make their instrument sound like a piano? Is the piano timbre so uninteresting that we have to resort to emulating other instruments? Instead of trying to sound like a cello, can't we just try to produce a beautiful warm piano tone that no other instrument can imitate? Too often we hear this shaming of the percussive nature of the piano. The percussive aspect can sound beautiful, even lyrical if done right. We should embrace the percussive aspect of our instrument instead of trying to camouflage it. If you don't like the idea of hammers being propelled to hit strings, just quit the piano and get a goddamn cello.
Oh my this thread was a mistake. I should have known.
I am not shaming the percussion nature of a piano, it’s a great instrument. I didn’t mean that is all a piano can do, why the heck would I quit?
I wasn't targeting you. I was just expressing my exasperation regarding pianists who understand nothing about the mechanics of their instrument, and who see the piano as an 'orchestra wannabe' in a box, with no identity of its own. Very few pianists understand how the motion of each key is multiplied into a much larger motion of its hammer, how the hammer accelerates to the strings even in the softest attacks, how the whole process of each note is ultimately a ballistic one, where the shaping of the attack of each note is determined _before_ it is launched, as opposed to when it occurs as in non-percussive instruments, and so on. There is so much that is unique about our instrument that is underappreciated by most.
Never been fond of this idea of making the piano sound like another instrument. Why can't it just sound like a beautiful piano sound? Do teachers of other instruments ever tell their students to try to make their instrument sound like a piano? Is the piano timbre so uninteresting that we have to resort to emulating other instruments? Instead of trying to sound like a cello, can't we just try to produce a beautiful warm piano tone that no other instrument can imitate? Too often we hear this shaming of the percussive nature of the piano. The percussive aspect can sound beautiful, even lyrical if done right. We should embrace the percussive aspect of our instrument instead of trying to camouflage it. If you don't like the idea of hammers being propelled to hit strings, just quit the piano and get a goddamn cello.
Oh my this thread was a mistake. I should have known.
I am not shaming the percussion nature of a piano, it’s a great instrument. I didn’t mean that is all a piano can do, why the heck would I quit?
I wasn't targeting you. I was just expressing my exasperation regarding pianists who understand nothing about the mechanics of their instrument, and who see the piano as an 'orchestra wannabe' in a box, with no identity of its own. Very few pianists understand how the motion of each key is multiplied into a much larger motion of its hammer, how the hammer accelerates to the strings even in the softest attacks, how the whole process of each note is ultimately a ballistic one, where the shaping of the attack of each note is determined _before_ it is launched, as opposed to when it occurs as in non-percussive instruments, and so on. There is so much that is unique about our instrument that is underappreciated by most.
rubens ..... the remarks you're making appear to be of the against the fur/grain variety. Do not under-estimate the knowledge and capabilities of other forum members .... especially remarks like understand nothing. Should avoid condescending remarks such as 'wannabe'. Not a good habit.
Now that I think it seems that it was targeted at me by the quit and get a cello.
I wondering how many pianist think their own instrument is orchestra wannabe, I bet they still understand the piano uses a hammer, key, and a felt damper.
Before I joined this forum I was not as knowledgeable but I knew that the key somewhat launched the hammer and the hammer hit the string and the key lifted the damper.
I was just expressing my exasperation regarding pianists who understand nothing about the mechanics of their instrument, and who see the piano as an 'orchestra wannabe' in a box, with no identity of its own.
You're misunderstanding what great composers did - and continue to do - in their piano writing.
Liszt transcribed a lot of orchestral music for piano - not just stuff like the Beethoven symphonies, but also colorfully orchestrated works like the Symphonie fantastique, because he knew how to convey - even imitate - orchestral forces in the medium of piano. (Though he did admit defeat when asked if he could transcribe Mozart's K550 for piano.) And of course, lots of vocal music - Schubert Lieder especially. Did he not understand how a piano mechanism works? Of course he did, and he used it to his advantage. Most of the great piano composers did. Mozart wrote operatic vocal music for the medium of piano, Mendelssohn even coined "Lieder ohne Worte". Chopin too essentially composed a lot of vocal music for piano, inspired by the likes of Bellini and Donizetti. Which is why all piano teachers (worth their salt) will tell students to listen to the operas of Mozart to understand how to phrase his melodies, and the operatic arias of those Italian composers to understand Chopin's vocal inflections in his piano music. Great piano composers writing great piano music, using all the capabilities of the piano.
Quote
Very few pianists understand how the motion of each key is multiplied into a much larger motion of its hammer, how the hammer accelerates to the strings even in the softest attacks, how the whole process of each note is ultimately a ballistic one, where the shaping of the attack of each note is determined _before_ it is launched, as opposed to when it occurs as in non-percussive instruments, and so on. There is so much that is unique about our instrument that is underappreciated by most.
You grossly underestimate pianists, and I'm not even talking about those know how to who take apart their own pianos or tune them themselves (like Zimerman).
We pianists aren't stupid, and piano mechanism isn't rocket science. But the good ones amongst us know how to sing on the piano, and how to produce a singing tone and inflexion - as well as imitate various orchestral instruments at the behest of composers or transcribers. Liszt's audiences frequently remarked on how he was able to convey full symphony orchestras so successfully when he performed - and they aren't just talking about his orchestral transcriptions. And many great composers - past and present - say that they think orchestrally when writing for the piano. It is therefore incumbent on us pianists to convey their intentions to the best of our abilities: full-blown Technicolor, rather than just glorify in black & white because of misguided preconceptions that the piano is just a percussion instrument, the hammer cannot change trajectory after being sent on its course, blah blah blah.......
Absolutely PB. Even if somebody doesn't understand something, the forums can allow information and knowledge to be shared and transferred in a nice sociable way. Particular string instruments like cellos, violins, erhu etc ----- allow for pitch slides, and with very nice control too. And relatively long sustained sounds and level. Each individual instrument used on their own can provide very beautiful music and sounds (or even just interesting sounds) - in their own way(s).
And for particular applications ----- team-work (combinations of sounds for certain music --- such as strings and piano, and other combinations, can lead to impressive results.
Here are a couple of piano transcriptions for everyone's delectation (or displeasure, as the case may be ) - one of full orchestra, the other of a song:
Here are a couple of piano transcriptions for everyone's delectation (or displeasure, as the case may be ) - one of full orchestra, the other of a song:
The transcription is pretty cool! Also thank you for helping me find a new piece I want to learn 😉 (song one)
Originally Posted by SouthPark
Absolutely PB. Even if somebody doesn't understand something, the forums can allow information and knowledge to be shared and transferred in a nice sociable way. Particular string instruments like cellos, violins, erhu etc ----- allow for pitch slides, and with very nice control too. And relatively long sustained sounds and level. Each individual instrument used on their own can provide very beautiful music and sounds (or even just interesting sounds) - in their own way(s).
And for particular applications ----- team-work (combinations of sounds for certain music --- such as strings and piano, and other combinations, can lead to impressive results.